They're two completely different stats. B-R's Win Shares are based on Dean Oliver's work in Basketball on Paper, and you can get more info on how they're derived here. Wins Produced are Dave Berri's work in The Wages of Wins, and you can get more info on how they're calculated here.

The biggest difference is that Oliver believes in the value of shot creation (though to a lesser extent than, say, Hollinger), while Berri doesn't believe in it at all; in Berri's system, shooting at anything less than average efficiency counts against you, while Oliver's system gives a bit more of a break to high usage guys.

Just because the posters on this forum homerishly over value Landry's on court ability doesn't mean that every guy that writes about ball for a living is wrong about the contract.

Didn't we all see him squat down and take a big big deuce in the playoffs last year? He was a zero. He lost the trust of this coach and teammates in the same way that a nightime highway driver does not trust a deer to move out of the way of the car. He was 100% overwhelmed by the moment in a first round playoff series, to the point that his minutes were reduced despite a season-ending injury to Shumpert. We can spend all day agruing about his average-at-best credentials according to basketball reference or his somewhat encouraging rookie campaign pre-melo, but the truth is that the guy has a big moment to prove himself and all he proved as that he's a below average player unworthy of playoff minutes in the NBA.

So we all saw proof in the playoffs that he's a below average player. Yet he's got a contact that pays him an above average salary. Translation: If you don't think he's overpaid, you're wearing homer glasses. We can still hold out hope the he'll contribute something meaningful or progress as a player, but only a Raptors employee or fan would are that he is not overpaid at the number we gave him. For crying out loud, the goddamn Knicks didn't match the offer; that's pretty strong evidence the guy's overpaid. The guy is a 8/9th man talent making 5/6th man money. It's not Gilbert Arenas overpaid, but he's still overpaid.

Even if the signing was for 8/9th man money, it was still a stupid deal because it was only done to facilitate the Nash signing... and we all know that Nash left BC looking like a retard with his dick out. So there's that.

Oh there's the whole thing about how we went out of our way to overpay a restricted free agent who plays the same position as two recent lottery pick. Even if he lives up to the $ in his contract, he's going to be taking minutes from guys that we spend lottery picks on.

Oh and the $ used to sign him leaves us we much less flexibility to bring on the stud SF that we desperately need to jump to the next tier in the east.

In summary:
---> He is overpaid. Not egregiously but still overpait
---> There are multiple other reasons why the signing was a bad idea
---> Claiming that the entire world of basketball analysis (outside of Raps Repub) is wrong about this guy makes you a homer
---> It's OK to be a homer because we are stuck with this guy so we may as well hope he produces.

Hold up. His play in one short playoff series, against the two best goddamn wing players in the league, is somehow "proof" that he's a below average player?

And the fact that the Knicks didn't match is evidence that he's overpaid? Are you nuts? For one thing, the Knicks' front office has shown, time and again, that they are one of the worst in the league. They've got more money to play with than anyone else except for possibly the Lakers, one of the most attractive cities in the NBA to play in, and they still can't build a winner. And for another, he would have cost the Knicks much more than the $18.75 mil we're paying him because of the backloaded contract offer and their luxury tax situation.

In summary:

---> He's not overpaid
---> Your "other reasons" depend on your faulty evaluation of him as a bad player
---> I'd rather be a homer than a hater

Hold up. His play in one short playoff series, against the two best goddamn wing players in the league, is somehow "proof" that he's a below average player?

And the fact that the Knicks didn't match is evidence that he's overpaid? Are you nuts? For one thing, the Knicks' front office has shown, time and again, that they are one of the worst in the league. They've got more money to play with than anyone else except for possibly the Lakers, one of the most attractive cities in the NBA to play in, and they still can't build a winner. And for another, he would have cost the Knicks much more than the $18.75 mil we're paying him because of the backloaded contract offer and their luxury tax situation.

In summary:

---> He's not overpaid
---> Your "other reasons" depend on your faulty evaluation of him as a bad player
---> I'd rather be a homer than a hater

Call me crazy for using the most important games of the guy's career as the measuring stick for his abilities. Please continue to ignore the most important games of a player's career when crafting your opinions.

Please explain further how citing that he duplicates 2 of our 4 recent lotto picks depends on my evaluation of him as a bad player.

Sidenote: He's not a "bad" player. He's an NBA bench warmer (translation: still awesome at basketball). He's a below average NBA player, but not a bad player.

Thank you for self identifying, but we all already know youre a homer based upon you defence of the contact the excuses for inarguably sub-par playoff performance.

You have seemed to insinuate that I am somehow a hater just because I recognize this was a stupid move by BC. Again, this may be crazy talk, but I think there is room for a fan to criticize a bad move by the GM without "hating" the team.

Is it wrong of me to translate the "I'd rather be a homer than a hater" comment to "I will blindly buy into anything my team does even if there is overwhelming reasonable evidence to believe otherwise"? Or is that jumping too far on my part?

Call me crazy for using the most important games of the guy's career as the measuring stick for his abilities.

You're crazy. For one thing, it's five games. Anyone who would use a sample size that small, all coming against the same team, is an idiot. And it's against the frigging Heat! Even great players often end up looking like shit going up against LeBron and Wade.

In conclusion, obvious troll is obvious.

NoBan wrote:

Please explain further how citing that he duplicates 2 of our 4 recent lotto picks depends on my evaluation of him as a bad player.

My apologies, that point is at least not stark raving insane. It was a bit hard to pick it out of the rest. But I happen to think that DeMar isn't very good, and that this is likely to be his last season here. And there are 96 minutes a night to go around at the wing positions. Even with DeMar and Ross, there's plenty of playing time for everyone.

I agree that the point about the Knicks not matching is unfair due to the tax implications.

Although I buy into advanced statistical analysis as a strong evaluation tool, i also believe there's moments of judgement in any given basketball life. Although it certainly is a low sample size, the playoffs in NY in the face of depleted depth and the Big 3 as opponents seems like a moment of judgement.

But now that I'm thinking about it, after failing in a moment of judgement, wouldnt the best thing for a young player be a quick change of scenery and an opportunity to play a role and re-establish himself? It's not like I'm rooting against the guy. I'll gladly eat crow if he blossoms here. And, as has been already pointed out, just because he's overpaid doesnt stop him from contributing. Like Jose last season. Clearly overpaid, still able to contribute. That's best case scenario here.

- The key to being good in this league the way the cap is structured is to avoid paying "average" players a "average" salary. In a perfect world, pay your superstars whatever it takes to keep / attract them - which by definition means after your top 3-4 guys, in order to be successful, you need to find bargains (because likely a couple of your top 3-4 wont be a "bargain" .. but they are worth it because of their talent). Think Rudy Gay as an example of a guy who is "overpaid" but at the same time "worth it" if hes your third best player like he is on the Grizz. I think its safe to say even from the Landry supporters, that hes not a difference maker. Even on this team .. hes something like the 5-6th best player .. and on a better team he could be lower on the depth charts. So even if you conclude his play is exactly average and so is his salary, it doesnt mean hes a good signing
- To the Landry supporters, I would flip the arugment a little bit and ask you, can you coherently argue that hes underpaid (or that hes clearly NOT overpaid). I can buy that its arguable that hes either fairly paid or overpaid .. I cant see any argument that hes legitately underpaid. Kind of twisted logic .. but if thats the case, my conclusion has to be that hes not fairly paid, because if he was there would be equal arguments for both over and underpaid .. and I simply dont see them
- I think as some people have well pointed out .. the arugment of "might as well spend it .. ununsed cap space / money doesnt do us any good" is flawed. Both the $ and the cap space can be used in many different ways whether that is to sign new players now or better players in the future
- you can talk about the cap hit being 6.25 mm / year, but the actual dollars in yr 3 are 10 mm - so trading him will be a little more difficult, than say, trading amir, whose contract goes up gradually like a normal one and equals its cap hit at the end.
- taking all this into account . my take is Im ok with the Landry signing. Hes a solid 5th starter / early guy off the bench in the league. But, he is overpaid. Not in a crippling way .. but certainly overpaid.

- To the Landry supporters, I would flip the arugment a little bit and ask you, can you coherently argue that hes underpaid (or that hes clearly NOT overpaid). I can buy that its arguable that hes either fairly paid or overpaid .. I cant see any argument that hes legitately underpaid. Kind of twisted logic .. but if thats the case, my conclusion has to be that hes not fairly paid, because if he was there would be equal arguments for both over and underpaid .. and I simply dont see them

I actually do think he's underpaid, and Matt52 made that case earlier in this thread:

Matt52 wrote:

Using TheNBAGeek.com and 9.15 wins produced he 'should' be earning $16M.
Using Basketball-Reference.com and 4.75 wins produced he 'should' be earning $8.3M.

No matter how you cut it the man at $6.23M per year (as his salary cap hit, he is getting paid $5M, $5M, $8.7M) he is a bargain!

And that's assuming his play over the next three years will be somewhere in between how he played his 1st and 2nd year. Since players in their early 20s historically tend to continue to improve, I expect better than that. I think he's a phenomenal value.

He's underpaid because advanced stats love the guy (adjusted +/- does too, though personally I don't generally put too much stock in those numbers), and more and more of the smart teams in the league are basing their decisions on advanced stats. If he didn't get this offer from us, he would have gotten it elsewhere, you can be sure of that.

I didn't want to make that case myself, because I wanted the focus of the thread to be on the myth that he's overpaid, so I didn't want to fill it up with folks saying OMG UR AN IDIOT HOW CAN YOU THINK HES UNDERPAID. As long as you're willing to look at the data and be rational about it, it's impossible to argue he's overpaid. To make that case, you've got to either make specious arguments about "playoff clutchness" like NoBan did, or value scoring above all else (haven't seen anyone make that case yet, thank goodness).

I actually do think he's underpaid, and Matt52 made that case earlier in this thread:

And that's assuming his play over the next three years will be somewhere in between how he played his 1st and 2nd year. Since players in their early 20s historically tend to continue to improve, I expect better than that. I think he's a phenomenal value.

He's underpaid because advanced stats love the guy (adjusted +/- does too, though personally I don't generally put too much stock in those numbers), and more and more of the smart teams in the league are basing their decisions on advanced stats. If he didn't get this offer from us, he would have gotten it elsewhere, you can be sure of that.

I didn't want to make that case myself, because I wanted the focus of the thread to be on the myth that he's overpaid, so I didn't want to fill it up with folks saying OMG UR AN IDIOT HOW CAN YOU THINK HES UNDERPAID. As long as you're willing to look at the data and be rational about it, it's impossible to argue he's overpaid. To make that case, you've got to either make specious arguments about "playoff clutchness" like NoBan did, or value scoring above all else (haven't seen anyone make that case yet, thank goodness).

I put the post up on WP but, to be perfectly honest, I do think he is overpaid. Not by a lot but still overpaid based on what he has done so far in the league thus far.

But overpaying is the nature of free agency - and especially restricted free agency.

I actually do think he's underpaid, and Matt52 made that case earlier in this thread:

And that's assuming his play over the next three years will be somewhere in between how he played his 1st and 2nd year. Since players in their early 20s historically tend to continue to improve, I expect better than that. I think he's a phenomenal value.

He's underpaid because advanced stats love the guy (adjusted +/- does too, though personally I don't generally put too much stock in those numbers), and more and more of the smart teams in the league are basing their decisions on advanced stats. If he didn't get this offer from us, he would have gotten it elsewhere, you can be sure of that.
I didn't want to make that case myself, because I wanted the focus of the thread to be on the myth that he's overpaid, so I didn't want to fill it up with folks saying OMG UR AN IDIOT HOW CAN YOU THINK HES UNDERPAID. As long as you're willing to look at the data and be rational about it, it's impossible to argue he's overpaid. To make that case, you've got to either make specious arguments about "playoff clutchness" like NoBan did, or value scoring above all else (haven't seen anyone make that case yet, thank goodness).

I strongly disagree with this statement. He might have got an offer from someone else .. but at no where near the money. Everyone was flat out shocked at the contract value when it got announced (and we all know it (at least the dollars) had at least as much to do with Nash as it did with Landry).
I think market value is probably something like $4 mm per year, as yes, someone else probably signs him for this. There is no evidence of anyone else willing to pay anywhere near what we paid.

As for the advanced stats - I guess we will see. While these stats have value .. just like normal stats, looking at something like WP in a vaccuum and make a claim that its an accurate determinant of success. But, i agree it is one measure and should be given some weight.

However, if for example, your argument was that Reggie Evans was underpaid because he was in the top 10 or top 20 in WP two years ago .. I would suggest your argument is quite flawed.

I strongly disagree with this statement. He might have got an offer from someone else .. but at no where near the money. Everyone was flat out shocked at the contract value when it got announced....

Actually, the usual prognosticators and media talking heads were flat out shocked. I don't recall seeing any other GM's announcing what they would or would not have paid. Nor did we see the head of any other teams stats group revealing what they had advised their bosses to do about Fields. We HAVE read that the Raptors stats guys were advising BC on what a good player Fields was, and that they were expecting his numbers this year to be better than last year and closer to (either slightly worse or better than) his rookie year. They mentioned that his play was affected by conditions on NY.

I can tell you for a fact that that I wasn't shocked because I hadn't paid enough attention to Fields to have an opinion. As far as the linkage to Nash, BC was getting kudos from much of the media, when they thought it was a slam dunk Nash was headed for TO. I agree it is impossible to look at that deal without taking the Nash chase into consideration. I think we will all know in two or three months whether Fields was overpaid or not.

As to arguments about financial flexibility, we have seen over the last three years that that has no impact if you can't get dance partners. I don't know why fans keep holding that up as some longed for state. It was financial flexibility that allowed the Raps to get Turk and Jermaine. How'd that work out?

Applying NoBan's logic, James Harden is also trash, because he clearly stunk it up in the Finals.

Blanket statements, especially when based on small sample sizes, are great. It doesn't take much effort to pop them out, instead of looking at each game against an entire body of work, figuring out what went wrong, and making an assessment on whether the small sample of new evidence reveals a fatal flaw or simply a weakness that needs to be worked on.

Body of work:
Landry is an average at very best player that regressed in his second year.

Looking at the playoffs:
I am not going to re-watch and code every Landry play from the series in question (is that what you expect, for real?), but suffice to say that Landry struggled to make shots and struggle to make sound, timely decisions. He lost the trust of his coaches and teammates.

Looking at the playoffs against the body of work:
He is an average at best player that regressed in his second year and lost the trust of this coaches and teammates in the playoffs. Do you qualify that as a blanket statement? It's more like an elementary observation from a fans perspective. Were you expecting more?

Fatal flaw or workable weakness:
Truth be told, it's probably a bit of both. A bit more experience in big moments, a more defined role in a team system, another summer working on his jumper and studying film, exposure to a knowledgeable and teaching coaching staff....... it all could add up well. But all those things are "maybes" at best. The truth lies in the explanation in the above paragraph. His play shouldnt have earned him the money we offered. He's overpaid. It was a bad signing. It's not nonsense. The nonsense is raptors fans thinking they are right and the entire world is wrong. Putting it to rest is akin to giving BC a pass on this dumb move and the assinine & (luckily) botched Nash courtship.

What I do agree with is shifting focus away from whether or not it was a good move (it wasnt), or wheter or not he's overpaid (he is). Instead we can focus on addressing some of the "maybes" listed above. BC got us into a lemon, so I'm fine with hoping for lemonade.

I got all excited when I discovered my name being mentioned in this thread.. I thought maybe it was a thread about my genius .. but it turns out it's just a thread about an overpaid player that we signed by accident. How disappointing!

Umm.. all sides of this argument seem correct depending on how you look at it. Here are my thoughts:

(1) The opportunity costs and all that are bang on. Sometimes you just can't help it -- you overpay a guy because you pretty much had to even if he wasn't worth it. It's not unlike an auction where you and one other person have $35 left and there's only 1 item left. If you want that item, you have to pay $35 and you have to be the first to do it, even if it's only worth $4. It's the same reason we got Turk for $10-11M. He was never worth $10M, but Portland offered him around that too so we had to overpay to get him.

(2) And therein lies the answer for whether or not he's overpaid. He is. The item in this case really was worth about $3-4m and we paid $6m. The reason he's overpaid is because of his valuation and how it was calculated. He was not offered $6m because he is a $6m player. He was offered that amount because that's the number they arrived at when they were coming up with a bid that they knew would screw over the Knicks. Bottom line for me about Landry Fields is that he's not excessively overpaid. Which leads me to my next point..

(3) Most NBA players are overpaid. It's because of the competition that we have to pay a bit more than the next team so that we can land the player we want. Landry is a poor example because we got him by accident but the end result speaks for itself. The goal for most teams is (a) stockpile talent and (b) try not to overpay unless absolutely need to.

I guess that leads to my conclusion on this topic. Is Landry Fields overpaid? I say he is but it's not the end of the world.

(3) Most NBA players are overpaid. It's because of the competition that we have to pay a bit more than the next team so that we can land the player we want.

Let me get this straight, NBA players are overpaid, because competition from employers drives their price up? Umm, hate to break it to you, but that's how all prices work. I don't mean to get technical, but you know, supply, demmand, and stuff? Demmand drives price up. This does not make paying that price overpaying, since that is the current price for whatever it is in demmand.

Look, I understand NoBan's argument, he thinks Landry is a poor player, and if he is right, then he is overpaid, because, presumably, since NoBan believes Fields is not very good, it is logically consistent for him to believe we could have spent the money in a better way.

I think that NoBan's argument for why he thinks Fields is a poor payer is weak and unconvincing, and I am more convinced by analysysts who use advanced stats to show that Fields is actually a really good player, but non-the-less, if NoBad is right that fields is poor, he is likely also right that Fields is overpaid.

However, all you people attempting to create some metaphysical interpretation of value that is somehow not based on real world supply and demmand are making logically inconsistent arguments.

Landry Fields price can not be judged against the salaries of other basketball players playing in the NBA anymore that it can be judged against fire fighters or porn stars, it can only be judged by how esle Totonto in particular could have spend the money.

If you believe, like I do, that Landry is a talented, young player who fits positional need and coaching style perfectly, then you must be happy with the acquisition at the price paid because that is the only price that we could have acquired this player, if we offered him a smaller contract he would have either not signed, or NY would have matched.

The only logical argument is that Toronto could have gotten someone better, which I don't believe.

Look at it this way, the Lowry acquisition cost us a draft pick. Now I love that acquisition too, but when the time comes to lose that draft pick it will hurt to watch a player we could have had drafted by another team.

If you belive Fields is a good player, then what's the downside to the Fields deal? Do you really believe having him under contracy is going to hinder significant future moves? I don't think so. Getting a player that fits the team and makes it better for only money, without giving up daft picks or equally valuable players is a coup. IMO, It's a great move.

And we are talking more or less a league average contract here, so it's not like this is a cap-crippling deal.

Look. Landry Fields IS overpaid, but reason being he was a restricted free agent, elaborating on the point Matt made, it's the nature of free agency. ESPECIALLY being he was a restricted one.

For what Fields has shown, and capable of doing, so far, 6$ million is a stretch. A guy that rebounds well, plays great defense, team-mindset offensively, average shooter, great character. He is a very good complimentary player in this league, but from what he's shown in his first two seasons, is he really worth 6$ million? At his age, and experience in the league, by league standards, he should really still be on that rookie scale contract worth 2-3$ million.